T. WONGRATANA, H. SENOU AND C.

VITTAYANON

12

From the extensive collections of Thai marine fishes which have been made by
the senior author since 1965, only 11 species of this family of fishes have been
recognized. Alphabetically, they are: Liza macrolepis (A. Smith) (senior syn. of

M. troscheli and L. borneensis), L. oligolepis (Bleeker), L. subviridis (Valen~iennes)

(senior syn. of M. dussumieri), L. lade (Forsskal), L. vaigiensis (Quoy and Gaimard),
Oedalechilus /abiosus (Valenciennes), Valamugil buchanani (Bleeker), V . cunnesius
(Valenciennes) (senior syn. of M. kelaartii or long1manus or strongylocephalus), V.
engeli (Bleeker), V. ophuyseni (Bleeker) (senior syn. of M. speigleri), and V . seheli
(Forsskal).

Unfortunately, another species from the Gulf of Thailand, which was

recorded from Kob Tao and listed as M . hererochilus (misprint of M. heterocheilos) by

SUVATTI (1949: p . 342; 1981 : p. 131), has never been rediscovered or examined by us.
However, two specimens 10.3-10.4 mm SL, labeled as Mugil heterochilus from Koh
Tao of H.M. Smith's collection maintained at the Kasetsart University Museum of
Fisheries, Bangkok, which was probably the basis of Suvatti's records, are certainly
V. seheli.

DISTRIBUTION OF MUGIL CEPHALUS

Mugil cephalus was originally described by LINNAEUS (1758 : p. 316) in his

Systema Naturae, lOth edition, from 'European Ocean', after P. Artedi . HAMILTONBUCHANAN (1822: p. 219) was probably the first to directly study this fish in Asian
waters, from the vicinity of the Ganges estuaries. At present, the species is known to
be the most widely distributed member of the mugilids, which comprise some 64 valid
living species within 14 genera (THOMSON, 1976). BHATIA & WONGRATANA (1974) listed
28 valid species for the whole area between the eastern Indian Ocean and westerncentral Pacific, but only 10 of these, including M . cephalus, are commercially important.
GOPALAKRISHNAN (1973) reported Mugil cephalus as "very widely distributed
in coastal waters and estuaries of tropical and subtropical zones (roughly between 42 N
and 42'S) of Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Ocean." And the fish is known " .. . to grow
up to 914 rom in length."
Economically, Mugil cephalus bas aroused considerable interest because it has
occurred in large numbers and is potentially a suitable food species for culturing in
many areas around Thailand and beyond. GOPALAKRISHNAN (1973) reported that,
M. cephalus " ... is very widely cultivated in different countries like Japan, Hong Kong,
China, Philippines, Korea, India, Egypt, Israel, Italy, France, Hawaii (USA) etc." On
the other hand the FAO Yearbook of Fisheries (1971: p, 32) indicated that the leading
mullet producers during 1964-1970 were USA, Brazil, Japan, Italy and Australia.

T. WONGRATANA, H. SENOU AND C. VITTAYANON

14

Description of Mugil cephalus from Songkhla

(Figures 1-2; Table

i)

Specimens studied:

NICA

168 mmSL, from mullet culturing cage, Boh Keng, east coast of the
outer part of Songkhla Lake; coli. T. Watanabe, 16 January 1982.
NICA 391 mmSL, mouth of Songkhla Lake; coli. S. Sukhawongs, during
1973-1974. It was figured by SUKHAWONGS (1974) under the name
Mugil longimanus or cunnesius but referred to as Liza strongylocephalus in the text.
NICA 393 mmSL, Songkhla fish market; coli. T. Watanabe, October, 1982.
The precise measurements and essential countings are recorded in Table 1.
Measurements were taken with fine point dividers or dial calipers, and expressed in
hundredths of standard length (SL).
Greatest depth of body (opposite origin of spiny dorsal fin) 4.0 in SL in the
smallest to 4.2-4.4 in SL iri large specimens; head 3.9-4.0 in SL.
First dorsal spine about equal in length to longest second dorsal ray, when
depressed its tip reaching to just behind base of the fin; first anal spine 2.5-3.0 in
second spine and 3.5- 4.3 in third spine; pelvic spine about 1.6 in longest ray; pectoral
fin 1.4-1.6 in head, its tip reaching to 9th lateral scale; tip of depressed pelvic fin
reaching to below space between 3rd and 4th dorsal spines in the smallest, but only to
below 1st or 2nd dorsal spines in the large fish; 2nd dorsal originating over 5th to 6th
anal rays, posterior margins of 2nd dorsal and anal fins broadly emarginated, inner
lobes of both fins about equal in length , their outer Jobes about 1.8-2.0 (in the 2 larger
fish) to 2.4 (in the smallest fish) times longer than inner lobes; caudal fin with posterior
margin deeply emarginate.
Scales sampled at axis of body and vertically above origin of anal fin weakly
ctenoid in both small and large fish, radii uniform and distinct in the small fish but
uneven and proportionally much shorter in the large fish (Figure 2,A,B). Basal halves
of 2nd dorsal, anal, pectoral and inner surface of pelvic fins minutely scaled, except
spiny dorsal fin and region near posterior margins of pectoral and caudal fins, which
are naked.
Obbasal pectoral scale only 2.0-2 .5 (in the larger fish) to 2.8 (in the
smallest fish) in longest pectoral fin ray; obbasal pelvic scale 1.9-2.2 in its longest fin
ray.
Mouth terminal, with a prominent symphysial knob at tip of lower jaw; from
ventral view of mouth, both rami (from point to point) form an angle of about 87"
from each other. Lips not thick, upper lip forming anterior tip of the head, lower lip
directed horizontally forward, maxillary not exposed when mouth is closed and not
curved downwards posteriorly; mandible smooth without fleshy lobes or lamellae.

16

T. WONGRATANA, H. SENOU AND C. VITTAYANON

Table 1.

Measurements and countings made on 3 specimens of Mugil cephalus

from Songkhla, expressed in hundredths of standard length (SL) .

Characters

Standard length (mm)

Head length
Snout length
Vertical eye diameter
Interorbital space
Width of upper lip
Upper jaw length
Body depth at 1st dorsal origin
Width at operculum
Least depth of caudal peduncle
Length of caudal peduncle
Snout tip to 1st dorsal origin
Snout tip to 2nd dorsal origin
Preanal length
Prepectoral length
Prepelvic length
Length of 1st dorsal spine
Longest 2nd dorsal ray
Longest anal ray
Longest pectoral ray
Longest pelvic ray
Longest caudal ray
Shortest or mid-caudal ray
Dorsal rays
Anal rays
Pectoral rays
Branched caudal rays
Lateral rows of scales
Predorsal scales
Transverse scale rows above anal
Circumpeduncular scales
Gill rakers on 1st arch

* Outer half of 6th and 7th anal rays fused together.

168
25.47
7.62
7.08
12.62
1.25
7.20
25.00
18.39
10.83
18.39
50.48
74.58
69.05
27.20
37.98
13.15
14.52
14.23
18.04
14.76
26.90
15.48
IV; ii, 7
III, 8
ii, 16
6+ 6
39
25
14
20
41+64

391
24.90
7.80
5.86
12.38
1.12
6.67
23.91
16.67
9.28
17.95
48 .75
73 .66
72.89
25 .86
38.44
12.66
12.28
12.28
15.06
13.43
24.35
14.78
IV; ii, 7
III, 8*
ii, 15
6+ 5
39
24
14
20
64 + 97

393
25.39
7.89
5.14
13.00
1.17
7.30
22.77
17.68
9.16
17.05
48.57
72.52
72.11
25.44
36.95
12.31
11.86
12.26
15.78
13.51
24.48
14.17
IV; ii,7
III, 3
ii, 16
6+ 6
41
25
14
20
69 + 80

18

T. WONGRATANA, H. SENOU AND C. VITTAYANON

AN ARTIFICIAL KEY TO THE MUGILID FISHES

FROM THAILAND
la. Upper lip thick, its thickness 3.2-4.0% SL, with papillae and lobes on the edges;
lachrymal deeply notched at mouth corner; ventral surface of mandible without
scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .......... Oeda/echi/us /abiosus
lb. Upper lip thin, its thickness 0.8-2.5% SL, without papillae or lobes; lachrymal
not or slightly notched; ventral surface of mandible scaled . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2a. Posterior tip of maxillary not curved down at below tip of premaxillary; secondary squamation developed on scales; chin with patch of minute scales; pyloric
caeca only 2; cheek scale rows 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mugi/ cepha/us
2b. Posterior tip of maxillary curved down at below tip of premaxillary; secondary
squamation and scales on chin absent; pyloric caeca more than 4; cheek scale
rows 3-5 (mostly 4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3a. Tip of tongue more or less free; hind margin of lateral scales without disitations 4
3b. Tip of tongue adhering to mouth floor; hind margins of lateral scales with disitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4a. Pyloric caeca branched, totally with 18-34 tips; median scales on top of head not
reaching beyond posterior nostril; caudal fin nearly truncate; branched anal fin
rays 8; pectoral fins distinctly black; attains 381 mmSL ........ Liza vaigiensis
4b. Pyloric caeca 4-9, simple; median scales on top of head reaching to anterior
nostril; caudal fin more or less forked; branched anal fin rays 9 (rarely 8 or 10);
pectoral fins generally pale; attains 282 mmSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Sa. Posterior tip of maxillary hidden when mouth closed; upper surface of tongue
forming a longitudinal sharp ridge of acute angle in front view; depth at anal fin
origin 28.3-32.9% SL; total gill rakers 71-80; lateral scale series 24-25; pyloric
caeca 5-8; body with a broad faint band along median rows of scales in preserved
specimens; attains only 91 mmSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liza o/igo/epis
5b. Posterior tip of maxillary exposed when mouth closed; upper surface of tongue
with a longitudinal lower ridge of right or broader angle in front view; depth at
anal fin origin 20.7-25.7% SL; total gill rakers 97-119; lateral scale series 27-33;
pyloric caeca 4-6 (mostly 5); body with several faint stripes along upper rows of
scales in preserved specimens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6a. Adipose eyelid poorly developed, its gap 5.0-6.5% SL; pre-first dorsal fin length
52.3-54.5% SL; base of pectoral fin with a diffuse transverse marking in
preserved specimens, this marking golden when fresh ........ Liza macrolepis

20

T. WONGRATANA, H. SENOU AND C. VITTAYANON

Thanks are due to Mr. Pairoj Sirimontraporn of the National Institute of

Coastal Aquaculture, Songkhla, for loaning the 3 specimens in his care and a print of a
colour photograph of a fresh specimen to one of us (C.V.) for this study. Dr. Warren
Y. Brockelman kindly read and improved the manuscript. Marasri Wongratana, wife
of the senior author, was very helpful in typing the typescript.

REFERENCES
BANASOPIT, T. and T. WONGRATANA, 1967.

A checklist of fishes in the reference collection

maintained at the Marine Fisheries Laboratory.

Mar. Fisher. Lab., Bangkok, Contr. 7 :

1-73 .
BHATIA, U . and T. WONGRATANA, 1974.

Mugilidae. In W. Fischer and P.J.P. Whitehead, eds.,

FAO species identification sheets for fisheries purposes of the Eastern Indian _Ocean and
Western Central Pacific, FAO, Rome. No pagination.
BLEEKER, P. 1865. Nouvelle notice sur Ia faune ichthyologique de Siam.
II: 33 - 37.

Ned. Tijdschr. Dierk.,

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION. 1971. Catchings and landings. In Yearbook of Fisheries
and Statistics, Rome.
FOWLER, H.W. 1937. Zoological results of the third de Schauensee Siamese Expedition, Part 8Fishes obtained in 1936. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 89: 125-264.
GOPALAKRISHNAN, V. 1973. Taxonomy and biology of tropical fin-fish for coastal aquaculture
in the Indo-Pacific region. Pages 120-149 in T. V.R. Pillay, ed ., Coastal Aquaculture in
the Indo-Pacific region, Fishing News (Books) Ltd., London.
GUNTHER, A. 1861. Catalogue of the fishes in the British Museum, vol. 3. Adlard and Sons,
London, 512 pp.
HAMILTON-BUCHANAN, F. 1822. An Account of the Fishes of the Ganges.
Co., Edinborough, 405 pp.
NA NAKARA, P. 1952.

Pia Kra-bawk keo.

SUKHAWONGS, S. 1974.

Systematic studies on fishes of family mugilidae.

Archibald Constable &

Fisher. Gaz., Bangkok, 5 (1): 74 (in Thai).

Ann. Report, Songkhla

Fisher . Station, Dept. Fisher ., 1973-1974:265-270 (in Thai).

SUVATTl, C. 1949 . Fauna of Thailand.

Dept. Fisheries, Bangkok.

SUVATTI, C. 1981.

Rungsilpa Ltd., Bangkok, 379 pp.

Fishes of Thailand.

1100 pp. (in Thai).

(in Thai) .

THOMSON, J .M. 1976. The taxonomy of grey mullet. Pages 1-13 in O.H. Ores, ed., Aquaculture
of grey mullet, Cambridge Univ. Press, London.
WEBER, M. and L.F. DE BEAUFORT, 1922. The Fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago, vol. 4.
E .J. Brill Ltd., Leiden. 410 pp.
WONGRATANA, T . 1968. A checklist of fishes caught during the trawl surveys in the Gulf of
Thailand and off the east coast of the Malay Peninsula. Mar. Fisher. Lab., Bangkok,
Contr., 13: 1-96.
WONGRATANA, T . 1981. Economic fishes f rom the seas of Thailand. J. Sci. Soc., Bangkok, 36
(2) : 9-102 (in Thai).